B is correct. A contract requires genuine, voluntary consent. A signature obtained through an unlawful threat of physical harm is a classic example of duress, which prevents the threatened party ' s apparent consent from being genuinely voluntary.
The resulting agreement is ordinarily characterized as voidable by the victim of the duress. Wendy may seek rescission or otherwise avoid enforcement because her agreement was induced by coercion. This distinction is important: “voidable” generally means the contract can be rejected by the protected party, whereas a “void” contract is treated as legally ineffective from inception.
The fact that the sale price happens to be commercially reasonable does not cure the coercion. Consideration can be present—a promise to transfer the property in exchange for payment—while consent is still defective. Therefore D is also incorrect. The defect lies in the manner consent was obtained, not in the existence of consideration.
Massachusetts Board Contract Law curriculum expressly identifies undue influence or duress among grounds for rescission and requires candidates to distinguish valid, void, voidable, and unenforceable contracts.
Study Guide Reference: Contracts — voluntary consent, duress, rescission and voidable contracts.
